Indurain cracking
I reckon he was not as juiced as some of them...have been looking through the old clips and he cracks. he would have lasted longer than 96 on EPO...he could have won in 97 IMO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVKIIVqH ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVKIIVqH ... re=related
0
Comments
-
Dave, the tooth fairly does not exist, the moon is not made of cheese and Indurain did (in my view not that of Bikeradar or any who sail in her) use EPO.
I think he cracked mentally. The weight of expectation and the pressure to constantly perform wore him down.It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
The user and all related content has been deleted.0
-
phips wrote:When is it generally accepted that EPO started to get used in the peloton? I always thought around 93, 94 ish. Which in my foolishly optimistic outlook on things makes me think [hope] Indurain was actually clean.
(I bet I've just chucked petrol on a bonfire :roll:)
The Italiians led the way in 90/91, where we saw the transformation of such riders as Chiapucci and Bugno. The Belgians, Dutch and Spanish weren't far behind.
Lemond, Herrera, Mottet and other non-users were toast by 92 when it had become de rigeurIt's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
Large-scale EPO abuse probably started in 90/91 when complete donkeys like Chiapucci came from nowhere to be GT contenders. EPO became available in 1987 when a few specialists started experimenting with certain Italian squads (allegedly!). I'm in no doubt that 'hormone therapy' was extensive in Banesto when the whole tour squad had a blood count of something like 49.9% - a near biological impossibility.Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..0
-
The user and all related content has been deleted.0
-
not saying he didn't do EPO...but he took a fine Paris Nice win in 89 ahead of Roche and soloed to a mountain top stage win 2 seasons before EPO hit the peleton...and just watching him lose wheels there...the way Pantani and Berzen trounced him but never again thereafter...makes me think he did some of his rides cleaner and then went blood doped0
-
Dave_1 wrote:not saying he didn't do EPO...but he took a fine Paris Nice win in 89 ahead of Roche and soloed to a mountain top stage win 2 seasons before EPO hit the peloton...and just watching him lose wheels there...the way Pantani and Berzen trounced him but never again thereafter...makes me think he did some of his rides cleaner and then went blood doped
Why use something as logistically difficult as blood doping when EPO was available and couldn't be detected? It makes no sense. He probably lost to Pantani and Berzin because they were peaking for the Giro whereas his main season goal was the Tour.0 -
andyp wrote:Dave_1 wrote:not saying he didn't do EPO...but he took a fine Paris Nice win in 89 ahead of Roche and soloed to a mountain top stage win 2 seasons before EPO hit the peloton...and just watching him lose wheels there...the way Pantani and Berzen trounced him but never again thereafter...makes me think he did some of his rides cleaner and then went blood doped
Why use something as logistically difficult as blood doping when EPO was available and couldn't be detected? It makes no sense. He probably lost to Pantani and Berzin because they were peaking for the Giro whereas his main season goal was the Tour.
yeah, did. Listen, i read his reaction to Riis confession and it was along the lines of shut it Bjarne you are blowing this gaffe entirely.
Ok, well...where do you put Indurain then? untalented...or super talented doing his job? not wanting to argue over it...just curious...have no cyclist from era I respect now...so curious of what others think0 -
Indurain was a strong rider and a brilliant climber for a big man before the advent of EPO. He never would have been a Tour contender without it though. He also was already developing into the best chrono man of his generation in the 80s.
But EPO skewed everything and still does and makes it frankly impossible to truly judge riders of the last 20 years.
He doesn't annoy me as much Chiapucci and Rominger who showed nothing before Ferrari-Conconi popped into cycling.It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
Or a certain Irishman who had shown potential, but was of a fragile disposition but when he started working with a certain doctor won everything one year? It is an incredible co-incidence that as soon as Amgen launch their product, a certain rider demonstrates a power of recovery beyond his means - but of course the asterisks in the good doctors medical notes were something to do with vitamins, no?Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..0
-
Monty Dog wrote:It is an incredible co-incidence that as soon as Amgen launch their product, a certain rider demonstrates a power of recovery beyond his means - but of course the asterisks in the good doctors medical notes were something to do with vitamins, no?
Well, that certain rider has openly stated he was on EPO for chemotherapy recovery, like thousands of others treated by chemotherapy. Should he have just died for the sake of some moral code?0 -
Monty Dog wrote:Or a certain Irishman who had shown potential, but was of a fragile disposition but when he started working with a certain doctor won everything one year? It is an incredible co-incidence that as soon as Amgen launch their product, a certain rider demonstrates a power of recovery beyond his means - but of course the asterisks in the good doctors medical notes were something to do with vitamins, no?
You're mixing up your eras. The Roche files relate to his second stint at Carerra when Chiapucci (who was a lowly domestique in 87) was top dog. Not saying Roche was a good boy, but he didn't have the option to use EPO in 87. And he did not have a "fragile disposition".It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
Monty Dog wrote:Or a certain Irishman who had shown potential, but was of a fragile disposition but when he started working with a certain doctor won everything one year? It is an incredible co-incidence that as soon as Amgen launch their product, a certain rider demonstrates a power of recovery beyond his means - but of course the asterisks in the good doctors medical notes were something to do with vitamins, no?
You're mixing up your eras. The Roche files relate to his second stint at Carerra when Chiapucci (who was a lowly domestique in 87) was top dog. Not saying Roche was a good boy, but he didn't have the option to use EPO in 87. And he did not have a "fragile disposition".It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
Does anybody on here really think that the riders from bygone days wouldn't of used EPO if it were available? I mean if the like of Tom Simpson had the option of EPO would he have used it?? Doping is as old as the tour, there is no golden age. There are exeptions but they are the exeption? Only now with the new EPO tests and the bio passports is the coner slowly being turned.0
-
keep in mind these guys were racing on bikes 4-5lbs heavier than today's bikes and you could have put any of them straight in there beside Contador and Evans, LA and they would be winning or in top 3 of GC after 3 weeks...who could have said that top riders of 1980 would have been able to ride with these guys in 1994? Unless genetic doping appears soon then different eras will ride at the same speed0
-
Moray Gub wrote:Timoid. wrote:And he did not have a "fragile disposition".
Apart from his constant knee injury his bad back and loss of power in his left leg you may be right you know !
MG
Fragile disposition implies mental fragility.
Yes he had a knee injury (from 86 onwards) and a bad back (so did Merckx), but that that had nothing to do with his disposition.It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
Amgen produces EPO in 1987 and I expect it was out for medical trials - experienced doctors would have understood the potential impact on physiology and were probably keen to experiment- not a coincidence? 'Fragile disposition' referred to his tendency to suffer from recurring injuries.Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..0
-
Monty Dog wrote:Amgen produces EPO in 1987 and I expect it was out for medical trials - experienced doctors would have understood the potential impact on physiology and were probably keen to experiment- not a coincidence? 'Fragile disposition' referred to his tendency to suffer from recurring injuries.
My first memory of hearing about EPO being used in cycling was around August 1990. I think it was mentioned in Bicycling magazine or possibly Winning.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
Monty Dog wrote:Amgen produces EPO in 1987 and I expect it was out for medical trials - experienced doctors would have understood the potential impact on physiology and were probably keen to experiment- not a coincidence? 'Fragile disposition' referred to his tendency to suffer from recurring injuries.
From Webster's Dictionary - Fragile Disposition: prevailing tendency, mood, or inclination b: temperamental makeup c: the tendency of something to act in a certain manner under given circumstances.
His injuries started in 86. He had been 3rd in the 85 Tour and started as the man in 87.It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
Timoid. wrote:Moray Gub wrote:Timoid. wrote:And he did not have a "fragile disposition".
Apart from his constant knee injury his bad back and loss of power in his left leg you may be right you know !
MG
Fragile disposition implies mental fragility.
Yes he had a knee injury (from 86 onwards) and a bad back (so did Merckx), but that that had nothing to do with his disposition.
Anyone from that era would recall that Stephen Roche,as classy as he was,never had the physical recovery of,say,Sean Kelly,and was very prone to injury
Just think,if you could have the hard as nails make up of Sean Kelly & the class of Roche,you would have had a rider that you could certainly talk of in the same breath as Merckxso many cols,so little time!0 -
nick hanson wrote:Just think,if you could have the hard as nails make up of Sean Kelly & the class of Roche,you would have had a rider that you could certainly talk of in the same breath as Merckx
If Lemond hadn't got shot, Roche would have never won the Tour. He was definately classy but IMO lucked out a bit when Greg wasn't there.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
nick hanson wrote:I never took it that fragile disposition implied anything to do with mental strength.
Anyone from that era would recall that Stephen Roche,as classy as he was,never had the physical recovery of,say,Sean Kelly,and was very prone to injury
Just think,if you could have the hard as nails make up of Sean Kelly & the class of Roche,you would have had a rider that you could certainly talk of in the same breath as Merckx
Have you seen the famous La Plagne stage? Roche wasn't lacking in the hardness stakes.
Besides, here's a brief history of Amgen's EPO (Epogen):
1983/4: First patents filed
1987: First human trials
1988: Patent granted in US
1989: Product launched
2004: Amgen successful patent infringement suit against makers of Dynepo in UK finally ends in the House of Lords (now the most important case in UK patent law)
2007: Amgen successfully sue Roche (the drug company, not the cyclist) for patent infringement by Micera in the US.
There's no way Roche (the cyclist not the company) could have had it in 1987. Anything in the 80s I don't believeTwitter: @RichN950 -
Timoid. wrote:Moray Gub wrote:Timoid. wrote:And he did not have a "fragile disposition".
Apart from his constant knee injury his bad back and loss of power in his left leg you may be right you know !
MG
Fragile disposition implies mental fragility.
Yes he had a knee injury (from 86 onwards) and a bad back (so did Merckx), but that that had nothing to do with his disposition.
He had a habit/tendency (in other words a disposition) of being fragile so in summary he had a fragile disposition.
MGGasping - but somehow still alive !0 -
Moray Gub wrote:Timoid. wrote:Moray Gub wrote:Timoid. wrote:And he did not have a "fragile disposition".
Apart from his constant knee injury his bad back and loss of power in his left leg you may be right you know !
MG
Fragile disposition implies mental fragility.
Yes he had a knee injury (from 86 onwards) and a bad back (so did Merckx), but that that had nothing to do with his disposition.
He had a habit/tendency (in other words a disposition) of being fragile so in summary he had a fragile disposition.
MG
Would you care to share where he showed fragility? The man was nails.It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
Timoid. wrote:[quote="
Would you care to share where he showed fragility? The man was nails.
Sure at times he was but his body couldnt take the rigours of pro cycling hence his injury list as long as your arm. A kind of Bryan Robson of the cycling world if you like, he was nails as well but his fragility when it came to injuries was well known.
MGGasping - but somehow still alive !0 -
I think this has degenrated into a debate on the meaning of "disposition". I would interpret "fragile disposition" as referring to his mental state, as in "He has a sunny disposition". Why not just use "injury-prone"?Le Blaireau (1)0
-
DaveyL wrote:I think this has degenrated into a debate on the meaning of "disposition". I would interpret "fragile disposition" as referring to his mental state, as in "He has a sunny disposition". Why not just use "injury-prone"?
Why should that be used when fragile disposition covers that just as well ?
MGGasping - but somehow still alive !0